Dang! My expiriment failed miserably. First, I forgot that our new sauna only gets to about 80 C. Second, I couldn't find my old phone and didn't want to test this with company phone. Well, maybe next time:)
But still they have to authenticate against AD to access shares? Well, I guess this depends how things are configurated but I sure as hell can't access our corporate network shares without proper authentication.
Tampere, Finland -24 C and blowing like hell. It was -34,8 C yesterday in Keitele, Finland where I used to live before I moved to Tampere. And yes, my Nokia works just fine and isn't even red!:)
I worked in a company which built their own VPN style software. I was in the team writing Windows NDIS (network stuff) drivers. Now if you played by the book (DDK specs) everything went fine. But there were, and still are, some AV software vendors that wasn't acting nicely and they were doing all kinds of nasty stuff with their own drivers and not respecting DDK specs at all. I think they were intercepting messages passed to the drivers and altering kernel function pointers and stuff. I can't remember exactly. But anyway, this caused frantic BSODs with our driver and even with Microsoft's example skeleton driver.
Now those vendors were doing legitimate AV software. I can't even imagine which kind of havoc rootkit "vendors" would have caused.
It depends who provides the information. If it's government it's cencorship and generally bad, no matter how you try to brand it. If it's non-government entity then it's just business strategy and possibly bad only for the entity's reputation. In the first case, if you are not living in democratic country then you are out of luck. In the last case, well, you are out of luck:)
I spent part of today working around problems with a closed source application.
The other part of the day has been working with an open source program, where I've already solved the problem
I can't see the logic in that:)
I write closed source software for living. With that logic, whenever there is a problem with the software, I just change the licence to some open source licence like BSD or GPL and problems gets magically easier to solve?
I've never sent bug fixes to open source applications but I've sent two bugfixes to Microsoft (and no, I don't work for them).
Reading that book is like having your autonomy assaulted, because the author constantly tries to get you to accept the things he's claiming
This is exactly what I'm looking for in books, blogs etc. I can read all the technical information about different desing/coding/testing/project-leading techniques I want from Wikipedia but I want to read how these things are done in the real life as well.
Let's take an example. I've been recently focused on MS Sql Server and T/SQL. Couple of weeks ago I read everything there is written about Table Partitioning (horizontal). I know now all the T/SQL magic I have to do to partition table. But what I don't know is when I should use this feature. What I now want to read is about actual real life experiences when DBAs have decided to partition tables, what was the motivation, how they did it and especially how things worked out. More the better if the text is written in imperative.
Now if the text is written in imperative all the better. It makes me to think from the writers perspective. Of course I don't always comply with the writer but at least it gives me a new perspective to things.
Oh, yes. I haven't actually read The Art of Unit Testing or Code Complete (just browsed it a bit). I just wanted to open up a bit. It's good for the/dev/soul:)
Yes, that and my personal opinion is that web sites should have less (X)HTML/CSS/Javascript masturbation. I don't care about the fancy outlook. Content is everything.
There are situations where I can take a wild guess but questioner must understand that a) it's a wild guess b) it only works in perfect world and if something goes wrong, and especially if that something is something I have no power over with, then you can safely double my bet. These situations are like if I'm asked to write some web based app for people who really don't know what they want. (Web based apps are for some reason really hard for me)
Then there are situations where I can take an educated guess. These are typically situations where I've written same kind of application before. These situations are starting to come more and more common now when I have ten years of professional programming experience behind me.
But if you keep gun to my head and demand exact estimate (can estimate even be exact?) then you could just go ahead and shoot me.
Oh. Thanks for the info. I'll definetely check RUP when I have spare time. My opinion is that you must have clear vision from the start for at least what is the problem we are trying to solve with this application. How else you can say when your project is finished? In agile development the goal is not always so clear and it can change a lot in the process even though things like Scrum was designed to prevent losing the focus/goal.
Dang! I thought I had perfect idea how to mix waterfall model with agile development. I started writing an article about it some months ago but can't get myself to finish it.
Idea was basically that when you start a project you must know at least something about what problem the project tries to solve and there's your goal. When the goal is at least somewhat clear you write requirements analysis and architectural specification. You can always come back to arch-spec but you have to understand that making dramatic changes means that costs go up and well as development time.
Next thing is to define interfaces. If your application has many different modules you need to define how those modules interact with each other. This helps in next step if there's going to be changes especially inside the modules.
After this we start agile "steps". You define one step or iteration. You write functional spec which sets to the goal that particural step. You can change func-spec when ever there's a need. Changes in the func-spec doesn't necessarily raise costs and development time much, not at least as much as changing arch-spec because changes touches only (hopefully) this one step.
Then I figured out that TDD and CI would be perfect models for this kind of development. With TDD and CI you at least have automatic regression tests which can (and will) be run every time something's changed. When one step is completed and fully tested you go to the next step and so on.
When all the steps are done you check that program meets every requirement and proceed to full system test in a duplicated production environment. If that goes OK then it's time to roll it to production and start sending bills.
But if you have already tested this and found out it doesn't work I think I save myself some time and send my half-baked artice to/dev/null:(
I used the same system. I made some changes to Linux, distributed it without giving out the source code and then switched to Windows. That doesn't so good anymore, doesn't it?
Uh! I would love to "upgrade" in-use shared library files so that changes are reflected to loaded instances in every running process! My viruswormtrojan would rule the world!
You are absolutely right. I just add one thing. Artery system works with heart pulse. Venous system (I'm not sure if that's the right worm, I'm not native English speaker) uses muscles like lymphatic system. That's why they instruct you to exercise your legs on long flights so you won't get thromboses (again, I'm not sure if that's the right term) on your legs. Or at least that's what they told me in elementary school some 20 years ago:)
Yes but that's the explanation I've heard. Software vendor XYZ wanted to that only (c) you see in the product is (c) XYZ. It's their choice and I can respect that. It's my choice to release code under MIT and I can perfectly respect other's choices to use whatever license they see fit, be it BSD, GPL, LPGL of whatver.
Now if we get back to the topic I think MIT could be the answer. There are some companies which prohibits all "external" code but it's their decision and loss. I personally wouldn't start to write proprietary license of my own without consulting a lawyer. There's a huge change I could get it wrong. So maybe the answer to the topic is: Ask if any other open source license will do and if not, consult a lawyer or forget about it.
But BSD licenses, all versions of them, contains the following condition.
Redistributions in binary form must reproduce the above copyright notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer in the documentation and/or other materials provided with the distribution.
I think that's what's bugging some vendors. They don't want to put other copyright notices but their own to binary distributions because it could be confusing to users. I can understand their point and I can understand copyright owner's point.
I've solved this by releasing all my code under MIT license. I don't care if my name shows up to the end user or not. All I care that my name is shown in the source code so all the rest of the developers in the world can see how clever, or stupid, I am!
I got my current job, which I like very much, with just two things.
First one, believe it or not, was honesty. I told everything as they are. There were couple of things that were required in the job advertisement and I didn't know much about them so I said "I don't much about them but I think I could learn them in a couple of months if you put me in some training" I think I said many things in the interview that wasn't very positive for me but in the end I think that it was my honesty that got me the job. If you put it other way around, would you hire a liar? (rhetoric question)
Second one was experience. I had about 10 years of work experience in the field. I based my (honest) answer on this. When they asked "do you know X" I answered "Yes. I used X in a project Y. I did/didn't like it. Oh yes, Y came out quite nicely and customer was happy about it. Would I use Y again? Yes/no because..."
Well, I find that "username@domainname" is much more intuitive and especially memorable than separate boxes or "domainname\username". I think that's because our user names are in the form of firstname.lastname (with some exceptions for people with same names) so when combined with domainname you get "firstname.lastname@domain.TLD" which is also user's email address.
Slashdot Mirror
Dang! My expiriment failed miserably. First, I forgot that our new sauna only gets to about 80 C. Second, I couldn't find my old phone and didn't want to test this with company phone. Well, maybe next time :)
Great idea! I think I try what my old Nokia thinks about sauna this evening. Let's see if it can stand 100 C :)
But still they have to authenticate against AD to access shares? Well, I guess this depends how things are configurated but I sure as hell can't access our corporate network shares without proper authentication.
Tampere, Finland -24 C and blowing like hell. It was -34,8 C yesterday in Keitele, Finland where I used to live before I moved to Tampere. And yes, my Nokia works just fine and isn't even red! :)
Just a side note, little of topic.
I worked in a company which built their own VPN style software. I was in the team writing Windows NDIS (network stuff) drivers. Now if you played by the book (DDK specs) everything went fine. But there were, and still are, some AV software vendors that wasn't acting nicely and they were doing all kinds of nasty stuff with their own drivers and not respecting DDK specs at all. I think they were intercepting messages passed to the drivers and altering kernel function pointers and stuff. I can't remember exactly. But anyway, this caused frantic BSODs with our driver and even with Microsoft's example skeleton driver.
Now those vendors were doing legitimate AV software. I can't even imagine which kind of havoc rootkit "vendors" would have caused.
Questioning the teachers' authority, of course.
That's really not an argument. Billions of flies think crap is good. What was your breakfast this morning?
It depends who provides the information. If it's government it's cencorship and generally bad, no matter how you try to brand it. If it's non-government entity then it's just business strategy and possibly bad only for the entity's reputation. In the first case, if you are not living in democratic country then you are out of luck. In the last case, well, you are out of luck :)
Oh, thank you. Now I got it. I don't usually fix other people's bugs, I just nag about them, so this didn't occur to me :)
I can't see the logic in that :)
I write closed source software for living. With that logic, whenever there is a problem with the software, I just change the licence to some open source licence like BSD or GPL and problems gets magically easier to solve?
I've never sent bug fixes to open source applications but I've sent two bugfixes to Microsoft (and no, I don't work for them).
Flooding is just one way/method to execute (D)DoS attack. You can read more here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Denial-of-service_attack#Methods_of_attack
This is exactly what I'm looking for in books, blogs etc. I can read all the technical information about different desing/coding/testing/project-leading techniques I want from Wikipedia but I want to read how these things are done in the real life as well.
Let's take an example. I've been recently focused on MS Sql Server and T/SQL. Couple of weeks ago I read everything there is written about Table Partitioning (horizontal). I know now all the T/SQL magic I have to do to partition table. But what I don't know is when I should use this feature. What I now want to read is about actual real life experiences when DBAs have decided to partition tables, what was the motivation, how they did it and especially how things worked out. More the better if the text is written in imperative.
Now if the text is written in imperative all the better. It makes me to think from the writers perspective. Of course I don't always comply with the writer but at least it gives me a new perspective to things.
Oh, yes. I haven't actually read The Art of Unit Testing or Code Complete (just browsed it a bit). I just wanted to open up a bit. It's good for the /dev/soul :)
Yes, that and my personal opinion is that web sites should have less (X)HTML/CSS/Javascript masturbation. I don't care about the fancy outlook. Content is everything.
I don't.
There are situations where I can take a wild guess but questioner must understand that a) it's a wild guess b) it only works in perfect world and if something goes wrong, and especially if that something is something I have no power over with, then you can safely double my bet. These situations are like if I'm asked to write some web based app for people who really don't know what they want. (Web based apps are for some reason really hard for me)
Then there are situations where I can take an educated guess. These are typically situations where I've written same kind of application before. These situations are starting to come more and more common now when I have ten years of professional programming experience behind me.
But if you keep gun to my head and demand exact estimate (can estimate even be exact?) then you could just go ahead and shoot me.
Oh. Thanks for the info. I'll definetely check RUP when I have spare time. My opinion is that you must have clear vision from the start for at least what is the problem we are trying to solve with this application. How else you can say when your project is finished? In agile development the goal is not always so clear and it can change a lot in the process even though things like Scrum was designed to prevent losing the focus/goal.
Dang! I thought I had perfect idea how to mix waterfall model with agile development. I started writing an article about it some months ago but can't get myself to finish it.
Idea was basically that when you start a project you must know at least something about what problem the project tries to solve and there's your goal. When the goal is at least somewhat clear you write requirements analysis and architectural specification. You can always come back to arch-spec but you have to understand that making dramatic changes means that costs go up and well as development time.
Next thing is to define interfaces. If your application has many different modules you need to define how those modules interact with each other. This helps in next step if there's going to be changes especially inside the modules.
After this we start agile "steps". You define one step or iteration. You write functional spec which sets to the goal that particural step. You can change func-spec when ever there's a need. Changes in the func-spec doesn't necessarily raise costs and development time much, not at least as much as changing arch-spec because changes touches only (hopefully) this one step.
Then I figured out that TDD and CI would be perfect models for this kind of development. With TDD and CI you at least have automatic regression tests which can (and will) be run every time something's changed. When one step is completed and fully tested you go to the next step and so on.
When all the steps are done you check that program meets every requirement and proceed to full system test in a duplicated production environment. If that goes OK then it's time to roll it to production and start sending bills.
But if you have already tested this and found out it doesn't work I think I save myself some time and send my half-baked artice to /dev/null :(
I'm doubtful that giving an invisible character semantic meaning is wise
(In the voice of dr. Farnsworth) Yes, yes. Let's all forget about those nasty invisible characters like \r \n and especially \0
I used the same system. I made some changes to Linux, distributed it without giving out the source code and then switched to Windows. That doesn't so good anymore, doesn't it?
Uh! I would love to "upgrade" in-use shared library files so that changes are reflected to loaded instances in every running process! My viruswormtrojan would rule the world!
You took the worms right out of my mouth :D
You are absolutely right. I just add one thing. Artery system works with heart pulse. Venous system (I'm not sure if that's the right worm, I'm not native English speaker) uses muscles like lymphatic system. That's why they instruct you to exercise your legs on long flights so you won't get thromboses (again, I'm not sure if that's the right term) on your legs. Or at least that's what they told me in elementary school some 20 years ago :)
Yes but that's the explanation I've heard. Software vendor XYZ wanted to that only (c) you see in the product is (c) XYZ. It's their choice and I can respect that. It's my choice to release code under MIT and I can perfectly respect other's choices to use whatever license they see fit, be it BSD, GPL, LPGL of whatver.
Now if we get back to the topic I think MIT could be the answer. There are some companies which prohibits all "external" code but it's their decision and loss. I personally wouldn't start to write proprietary license of my own without consulting a lawyer. There's a huge change I could get it wrong. So maybe the answer to the topic is: Ask if any other open source license will do and if not, consult a lawyer or forget about it.
But BSD licenses, all versions of them, contains the following condition.
I think that's what's bugging some vendors. They don't want to put other copyright notices but their own to binary distributions because it could be confusing to users. I can understand their point and I can understand copyright owner's point.
I've solved this by releasing all my code under MIT license. I don't care if my name shows up to the end user or not. All I care that my name is shown in the source code so all the rest of the developers in the world can see how clever, or stupid, I am!
I got my current job, which I like very much, with just two things.
First one, believe it or not, was honesty. I told everything as they are. There were couple of things that were required in the job advertisement and I didn't know much about them so I said "I don't much about them but I think I could learn them in a couple of months if you put me in some training" I think I said many things in the interview that wasn't very positive for me but in the end I think that it was my honesty that got me the job. If you put it other way around, would you hire a liar? (rhetoric question)
Second one was experience. I had about 10 years of work experience in the field. I based my (honest) answer on this. When they asked "do you know X" I answered "Yes. I used X in a project Y. I did/didn't like it. Oh yes, Y came out quite nicely and customer was happy about it. Would I use Y again? Yes/no because..."
Well, I find that "username@domainname" is much more intuitive and especially memorable than separate boxes or "domainname\username". I think that's because our user names are in the form of firstname.lastname (with some exceptions for people with same names) so when combined with domainname you get "firstname.lastname@domain.TLD" which is also user's email address.